Rants, Forums, Lighthouse
By
0zymandous,
Posted on: 2006-12-13 19:34 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<QR>
The reason some replies are deleted along with ones that don't look to be harmful is because any reply "chained" from that deleted one is deleted also unless you reply differently. Thats why harmless posts are sometimes wiped when a forum breaking post gets wiped.
I figured everyone knew that by now...
[/ QUOTE ]
ZOMG, we know that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Riiiiight Kali. Everyone knew that. Just look at a recent post you quoted.
WoW looking better for you? I bet the boards aren't moderated there.
This space is intentionally left blank.
I understand
I just meant I don't see things happening like you guys do , but I don't have time to post that much either .
I don't get up each day thinking to myself -lets see how many threads I can degrade- and -how can I end this post with some cool personal attack- I see this happen all the time by veteran players. This starts flame wars/ off topic discussions then it leads to the thread getting locked .
I think Lighthouse is doing great , even if he misses a couple bad posts.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<QR>
The reason some replies are deleted along with ones that don't look to be harmful is because any reply "chained" from that deleted one is deleted also unless you reply differently. Thats why harmless posts are sometimes wiped when a forum breaking post gets wiped.
I figured everyone knew that by now...
[/ QUOTE ]
ZOMG, we know that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Riiiiight Kali. Everyone knew that. Just look at a recent post you quoted.
WoW looking better for you? I bet the boards aren't moderated there.
[/ QUOTE ]
About as good as the SWG boards were anyways.
And um, UpLink, you were pretty rude so you kinda deserved that reply.
�Alas, regardless of their doom, the little victims play!� - Thomas Gray
[ QUOTE ]
Oh I missed that part of pt's post. You're totally corect though. Using extreme examples is a really poor method of communication.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please. PerfectTommy is the pt you were referring to here, not Part_Troll. I think it's an important distinction, especially in the light of Godwin's Law -- a rule I'm particularly fond of.
Ex
--
Ex.
Part-Troll, who used to be Excession777, now playing pantomime with people's mindlets.
--
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<QR>
The reason some replies are deleted along with ones that don't look to be harmful is because any reply "chained" from that deleted one is deleted also unless you reply differently. Thats why harmless posts are sometimes wiped when a forum breaking post gets wiped.
I figured everyone knew that by now...
[/ QUOTE ]
ZOMG, we know that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Riiiiight Kali. Everyone knew that. Just look at a recent post you quoted.
WoW looking better for you? I bet the boards aren't moderated there.
[/ QUOTE ]
They are moderated. Not as thoroughly as this forum, but when you have 10x to 100x as many posters, the workload increases greatly. WoW itself does continue to be the better game.
What does moderation have to do with it, though? I don't mind having forum moderation. I've been a moderator in the past. I think in moderation can be a great thing to encourage constructive discussion and discourage personal attacks and pointless offtopicness.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<QR>
The reason some replies are deleted along with ones that don't look to be harmful is because any reply "chained" from that deleted one is deleted also unless you reply differently. Thats why harmless posts are sometimes wiped when a forum breaking post gets wiped.
I figured everyone knew that by now...
[/ QUOTE ]
ZOMG, we know that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Riiiiight Kali. Everyone knew that. Just look at a recent post you quoted.
WoW looking better for you? I bet the boards aren't moderated there.
[/ QUOTE ]
About as good as the SWG boards were anyways.
And um, UpLink, you were pretty rude so you kinda deserved that reply.
[/ QUOTE ]
So I'm supposed to be hurt by that? No one is perfect, except the ones worshipped on the forums.
My "rude" comment was alot less harmful then some of the other stuff I've seen by you or just some of the posts others have made in this thread.
This space is intentionally left blank.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<snip>
Patrick Henry, William Wallace, Gandhi, Thomas Jefferson, Jesus. These guys all had problems with authority. The guys at the Nuremburg trials? Just following orders.
[/ QUOTE ]
By comparing yourself to them, and the moderation staff (and Lighthouse) to the guys at the Nuremburg trials, you are really inflating the importance of both yourself (hell, any poster on these boards) and the moderation team.
[/ QUOTE ]
And you cannot seem to read a complete post.
I was not comparing posting on a board to any action those people did, and I certainly did not compare the moderation team to the defendants at Nuremburg. Not even in the slightest.
What I DID do, was respond to PREVIOUS posts saying that I had problems with authority. I agreed that I did and so did they. Having problems with authority does not make you equal to any of those men. But having problems with authority is not in itself a bad thing, as THEIR actions proved.
I never said the moderators followed orders, as those at Nuremburg did. I said mindless following of orders was similar to the actions of those war criminals. NOTHING on this board in any way is similar to what was actually done by them. So in short I did not call ANYONE a nazi.
I was defending my statements which had accused me of having authority issues. THAT IS ALL! So thanks all for the clarification about calling someone nazis, but I didn't do it.
So to sum up for those who only read first and last paragraphs - I revel in my problem with authority, many great people have been the same. Mods are not being compared to Nazis. Mindless obedience is. Okay got that now?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<snip>
Patrick Henry, William Wallace, Gandhi, Thomas Jefferson, Jesus. These guys all had problems with authority. The guys at the Nuremburg trials? Just following orders.
[/ QUOTE ]
By comparing yourself to them, and the moderation staff (and Lighthouse) to the guys at the Nuremburg trials, you are really inflating the importance of both yourself (hell, any poster on these boards) and the moderation team.
[/ QUOTE ]
And you cannot seem to read a complete post.
I was not comparing posting on a board to any action those people did, and I certainly did not compare the moderation team to the defendants at Nuremburg. Not even in the slightest.
What I DID do, was respond to PREVIOUS posts saying that I had problems with authority. I agreed that I did and so did they. Having problems with authority does not make you equal to any of those men. But having problems with authority is not in itself a bad thing, as THEIR actions proved.
I never said the moderators followed orders, as those at Nuremburg did. I said mindless following of orders was similar to the actions of those war criminals. NOTHING on this board in any way is similar to what was actually done by them. So in short I did not call ANYONE a nazi.
I was defending my statements which had accused me of having authority issues. THAT IS ALL! So thanks all for the clarification about calling someone nazis, but I didn't do it.
So to sum up for those who only read first and last paragraphs - I revel in my problem with authority, many great people have been the same. Mods are not being compared to Nazis. Mindless obedience is. Okay got that now?
[/ QUOTE ]
You may not have meant to do that, but your post certainly came across as if you were doing so.
Your first couple of paragraphs comment on previous posts and how your problems with Cricket are resolved. Your next paragraph is a prologue to those who think your posts are "immature" and that you "have a problem with authority." The next two paragraphs say that you do have problems with authority, and that those who mindlessly follow someone with authority are sheep. You then mention, in your last paragraph, others who had problems with authority (the people) and what happened to those that simply followed orders, like sheep.
As I said above, you may not have meant to imply it or make the comparison, but the way that your post is worded certainly makes it seem like you did.
If I misread it, I apologize.
Thank you Grok. Since I wrote it, I am generally unable to see what someone else might in the post. I hope my intent is clearer now and everyone realizes I was not calling the mods nazis. Nor was I calling myself Jesus, et al.
[ QUOTE ]
So I'm supposed to be hurt by that? No one is perfect,
[/ QUOTE ]
I resent that. I in fact am. 
[ QUOTE ]
I never followed the love boat. But... could julie have been able to do her job if it were "strictly business"? Or did she have to have a bit of personality? Put a bit of herself into her work? And is that avatar really a picture of you? I like to imagine that all forum avatars are of the people that post. Did you know miss kitty was really a manga character? It's true!
Zeus - god of a point, with some silliness added.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am in fact, a large tank driven by a small boy in search of his wayward frog.
And right now, we've hit the point where this thread should be locked because it's severely derailed.
But if the mods do lock it, are they being efficient and doing the right thing, or stamping on the posting rights of innocent forum goers and ruining the community? Discuss.
[ QUOTE ]
As I said above, you may not have meant to imply it or make the comparison, but the way that your post is worded certainly makes it seem like you did.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is possible to compare scenarios in terms of the concepts that are behind and are driving each of them without comparing degrees. I don't actually think he's implying that the moderation staff should/could/would be tried for attempted genocide and crimes against humanity either.
I'm not certain I would have chosen the examples that the poster in question did or that they are applicable in this case, but I can understand how he meant to compare them in terms of how they played out. I understand what he means if taken purely on their own as concepts.
Brother of Markus
The Lord of Fire and Pain
The Legendary Living Hellfire
Fight my brute!
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but some things should be untouched, like yesterday, someone on the pinnacle forums was warning everyone how a paticlur person was hijacking other peoples accounts and using it for his gain, that was definatly one that shouldve been left up, for what the guy did he deserved too get fried.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think if the OP could've left his name out and just warned us about how a hacker could hijacker out accounts and use it for personal gain. I think that this route if the OP had undeniable proof of how it was done, then it may have been better. But still I would have given the GM's the information and warn anyone I could about how it could be done without naming names. If I feel that I would be warned for sounding a warning then I would give my proof to the GM's or Lighthouse and see if they could properly warn our fellow players.
When a con moan con's someone is it better to warn people about the man or his con game? His con game of course, because if you do not then another copycat con man could use the same con and you could be riped off because the name is different.
Ebony Fists: Level 50 DM/Regen Scrapper, Gloom Piston Robotics/Dark mastermind level 34, QueenFireMare: Level 34 Fire blaster (pure fire),
Let me break it down a little further:
Having a disrespectful attitude toward authority does not, in and of itself, make you admirable. It just means you don't respect authority. Depending on circumstance, this might make you a heroic rebel or just a jerk.
My characters at Virtueverse
Faces of the City
[ QUOTE ]
Let me break it down a little further:
Having a disrespectful attitude toward authority does not, in and of itself, make you admirable. It just means you don't respect authority. Depending on circumstance, this might make you a heroic rebel or just a jerk.
[/ QUOTE ]
You bet, that makes sense to me. At the same time, however, one is not automatically classified as either simply due to the degree of importance, or lack thereof, of the issue at hand. It's possible to be a hero while "rebelling" against something as trivial as the moderation of an online forum about a computer game and it's possible to be just a jerk while "rebelling" against some societal phenomenon.
I'm not saying categorically that this is what it is, I'm just saying that simply because an issue is relatively unimportant doesn't mean that one is immediately a jerk.
Brother of Markus
The Lord of Fire and Pain
The Legendary Living Hellfire
Fight my brute!
[ QUOTE ]
Let me break it down a little further:
Having a disrespectful attitude toward authority does not, in and of itself, make you admirable. It just means you don't respect authority. Depending on circumstance, this might make you a heroic rebel or just a jerk.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree wholeheartedly. That was my point. I gave examples of great people that did not respect established authority. I also gave examples of those that did authority. I didnt' give example of good guys following the rules or bad guys not following them as that is considered the expected behaviour of each. I am saying call me anti-authority all you want. It isn't an insult.
And for the record, respect is earned never given.
[ QUOTE ]
And for the record, respect is earned never given.
[/ QUOTE ]
Personally, I'm of the belief that basic respect should be given as a matter of course.
"Basic respect" in this case meaning respecting the other person enough to discuss matters with them calmly and rationally, without resorting to personal attacks, and recognizing that the other viewpoint may well be valid, even more valid than one's own. That kind of "basic respect".
But then that's just me.
Current main:
Schrodinger's Gun, Dual Pistols/Mental Blaster, Virtue
Avatar: Becky Miyamoto from Pani Poni Dash. Roulette roulette~
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And for the record, respect is earned never given.
[/ QUOTE ]
"Basic respect" in this case meaning respecting the other person enough to discuss matters with them calmly...
[/ QUOTE ]
Its a quibble over connotation. There is a maxim (or cliche):
"Civility is owed. Respect is earned."
My scrapper doesn't need an AoE. She IS an AoE.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<QR>
The reason some replies are deleted along with ones that don't look to be harmful is because any reply "chained" from that deleted one is deleted also unless you reply differently. Thats why harmless posts are sometimes wiped when a forum breaking post gets wiped.
I figured everyone knew that by now...
[/ QUOTE ]
ZOMG, we know that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Riiiiight Kali. Everyone knew that. Just look at a recent post you quoted.
WoW looking better for you? I bet the boards aren't moderated there.
[/ QUOTE ]
About as good as the SWG boards were anyways.
And um, UpLink, you were pretty rude so you kinda deserved that reply.
[/ QUOTE ]
So I'm supposed to be hurt by that? No one is perfect, except the ones worshipped on the forums.
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh please, that's a huge load of bull. And I never said you should be hurt by it. They are just words on the forums. You were rude, you got a rude comment back and they just keep going.
[ QUOTE ]
My "rude" comment was alot less harmful then some of the other stuff I've seen by you or just some of the posts others have made in this thread.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow Uplink. I used to actually think you were a decent guy. But please, continue to try and attack other posters like myself. I assure you it's no skin off my back.
�Alas, regardless of their doom, the little victims play!� - Thomas Gray
[ QUOTE ]
And right now, we've hit the point where this thread should be locked because it's severely derailed.
But if the mods do lock it, are they being efficient and doing the right thing, or stamping on the posting rights of innocent forum goers and ruining the community? Discuss.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, they should have locked it a long time ago.
�Alas, regardless of their doom, the little victims play!� - Thomas Gray
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And right now, we've hit the point where this thread should be locked because it's severely derailed.
But if the mods do lock it, are they being efficient and doing the right thing, or stamping on the posting rights of innocent forum goers and ruining the community? Discuss.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, they should have locked it a long time ago.
[/ QUOTE ]
Everything that can really be said about moderation has been said. Now we're just repeating ourselves because we keep paraphrasing each other in bad ways.
Good times!
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
I can be decent. Its just sometimes well..only one life to live, so I can't be nice 100% of the time.
Plus..I could go into detail about myself but I'd rather not publicly on some of the things I've done..its a personal thing.
This space is intentionally left blank.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but some things should be untouched, like yesterday, someone on the pinnacle forums was warning everyone how a paticlur person was hijacking other peoples accounts and using it for his gain, that was definatly one that shouldve been left up, for what the guy did he deserved too get fried.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think if the OP could've left his name out and just warned us about how a hacker could hijacker out accounts and use it for personal gain. I think that this route if the OP had undeniable proof of how it was done, then it may have been better. But still I would have given the GM's the information and warn anyone I could about how it could be done without naming names. If I feel that I would be warned for sounding a warning then I would give my proof to the GM's or Lighthouse and see if they could properly warn our fellow players.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is *always* best to send this info directly to Lighthouse and the other rednames.
[ QUOTE ]
When a con moan con's someone is it better to warn people about the man or his con game? His con game of course, because if you do not then another copycat con man could use the same con and you could be riped off because the name is different.
[/ QUOTE ]
There is also the possibility that there was no account hijacking, and the post was just an attempt to grief the player named...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, breaking Godwin's Law=Critical Failure.
[/ QUOTE ]
Godwin's Law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
Are you sure Godwin's Law is the one you mean to reference here?
[/ QUOTE ]
I think that he means the more common usage of Godwin's law, at least, the more common one that I have seen used, that states that as soon as Godwin's Law is true, the argument is automatically lost by the one who causes it to be true.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thats what I meant. I should have said "fulfilling" instead of "breaking." My bad.
Heroes
Dysmal
Lumynous
Sam Steele
Pluck
Wile
Slagheap
Pressure Wave
Rhiannon Bel
Verified
Stellaric
Syd Mallorn
Villains
Jotunheim Skald
Saer Maen
Jen Corbae
Illuminance
Venator Arawn
Taiga Dryad
Tarranos